GSB# 2017-3625

UNION# 2018-0234-0011

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Seddon)

Union

• and -

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of the Solicitor General)

Employer

BEFORE

Gail Misra

Arbitrator

FOR THE UNION

Dan Sidsworth Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Al J. Quinn Ministry of the Solicitor General Senior Employee Transition Advisor

HEARING

April 18 and July 19, 2019

DECISION

1Since the spring of 2000 the parties have been meeting regularly to address matters of mutual interest which have arisen as the result of the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services as well as the Ministry of Children and Youth Services restructuring initiatives around the Province. Through the MERC (Ministry Employment Relations Committee) a subcommittee was established to deal with issues arising from the transition process. The parties have negotiated a series of MERC agreements setting out the process for how organizational changes will unfold for Correctional and Youth Services staff and for non-Correctional and non-Youth Services staff.

2The parties agreed that this Board would remain seized of all issues that arise through this process and it is this agreement that provides me the jurisdiction to resolve the outstanding matters.

3Over the years as some institutions and/or youth centres decommissioned or reduced in size others were built or expanded. The parties have made efforts to identify vacancies and positions and the procedures for the filling of those positions as they become available.

4The parties have also negotiated a number of agreements that provide for the "roll-over" of fixed term staff to regular (classified) employee status.

5Hundreds of grievances have been filed as the result of the many changes that have taken place at provincial institutions. The transition subcommittee has, with the assistance of this Board, mediated numerous disputes. Others have come before this Board for disposition.

6It was determined by this Board at the outset that the process for these disputes would be somewhat more expedient. To that end, grievances are presented by way of statements of fact and succinct submissions. On occasion, clarification has been sought from grievors and institutional managers at the request of the Board. This process has served the parties well. The decisions are without prejudice but attempt to provide guidance for future disputes.

7Glenn Seddon is a Utility Officer Laundry at Trilcor Industries. He filed a grievance dated January 25, 2018 claiming that the Employer has breached various provisions of the collective agreement and improperly calculated his Continuous Service Date ("CSD"). The grievor is seeking to receive credit for all time he has spent in the Ontario Public Service ("OPS") included in the calculation of his CSD.

8The grievor had been a Correctional Officer at the Maplehurst Correctional Centre beginning in September 2001. He resigned in 2005 to join the Canadian Armed Forces. After he left the Armed Forces, on September 26, 2011 Mr. Seddon became employed at the Ontario Legislature as a Special Constable until February 1, 2013. On February 4, 2013 the grievor started at Trilcor Industries as a Driver, and on December 29, 2014 he got his current position as a Utility Officer Laundry at Trilcor.

9Mr. Seddon has a CSD of February 4, 2013. He maintains that he should be credited with all his past service in the OPS, which he believes also includes the time that he worked at the Legislative Assembly.

10Based on the evidence before me, employment as a Special Constable at the Legislative Assembly of Ontario does not constitute employment in the OPS. Furthermore, no staff of the Legislative Assembly are considered part of the OPS, and the only way that one may qualify for OPS-related entitlements, such as seniority carry-over, would be if there was a Reciprocal Agreement that addressed seniority carryover into the OPS from the Legislative Assembly, or vice versa. There is no such Reciprocal Agreement. As such, the grievor's tenure at the Legislative Assembly is simply not deemed to be work within the OPS, and he did not rejoin the OPS until February 4, 2013. That is the CSD that has been assigned to Mr. Seddon.

11With respect to Mr. Seddon's earlier years working as a Correctional Officer, the grievor resigned from his employment with the OPS in 2005 to join the Armed Forces. That resulted in the termination of his service pursuant to Article 18.4 of the collective agreement. Article 18.4 states that "Continuous service shall be deemed to have terminated if: (a) an employee resigns or retires;...". In accordance with Article 18.4, the grievor's resignation deems his continuous service up to that point to have terminated.

12This issue has been determined by the Board on a number of occasions including in the following decisions: OPSEU (Wiles) v. Ontario (MCSCS), GSB#2016-0300, 2016-0695, 2016-0696, December 6, 2016 (Briggs); OPSEU (Sutherland) v. Ontario (MCSCS), GSB#2016-0461, September 11, 2017 (Briggs); and, OPSEU (Bourgeois) v. Ontario (MCSCS), GSB#2017-0503, November 6, 2017 (Briggs). Nothing on the facts before me in this case makes the grievor's situation much different from those cases. The resignation in 2005 caused a break in his service.

13Having considered the facts and the submissions of the parties, and for the reasons outlined above, this grievance is denied.